• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Holder, Grilled on Gun Inquiry, Says He Won’t Resign

j-mac said:
Hmmmm....I don't know...Obama may be in for the moment, but your "side" is about to go down horribly, in what might be the largest repudiation of progressivism since the 40s. So I guess we'll have to put up with another 100 years of sneaky, underhanded incrementalism that is designed to dupe the people into your destructive net.

Markos Moulitsis (sp) may tout this pap you generate in here, but no one buys it anymore. Obama's vision of fundamental transformation has failed miserably...And your continued pretzel logic just makes you look foolish my friend.


j-mac
Click to expand...

That may or may not be true. I still think it will depend on who you nominate.

J, you really are blinded by your ideaology, sadly. I can't do much about that. But, I will bet you the next time republicans are in power, you won't see their corruption. Care to bet?
 
Boo Radley said:
That may or may not be true. I still think it will depend on who you nominate.

J, you really are blinded by your ideaology, sadly. I can't do much about that. But, I will bet you the next time republicans are in power, you won't see their corruption. Care to bet?
Click to expand...


Sure, what do you want to bet? Ooooh, I know, a million dollars.....heh, heh....Good GAWD man, get a grip will ya? you do realize this is the interwebs right?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Sure, what do you want to bet? Ooooh, I know, a million dollars.....heh, heh....Good GAWD man, get a grip will ya? you do realize this is the interwebs right?


j-mac
Click to expand...

How about one public acknowledgement?
 
Boo Radley said:
Marked and noted.
Click to expand...


Good, so now let's get back on topic shall we? Let's recap what we know now, Holder admits to 'misleading' congress over this, and is dancing all over the place to keep his job, up to and including calling those grilling him over this, racist, (yeah, no one has ever heard that before)....But the real question here, is why is Holder still in his position? Isn't this an Obama failure?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Good, so now let's get back on topic shall we? Let's recap what we know now, Holder admits to 'misleading' congress over this, and is dancing all over the place to keep his job, up to and including calling those grilling him over this, racist, (yeah, no one has ever heard that before)....But the real question here, is why is Holder still in his position? Isn't this an Obama failure?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Forgive me as I never did understand how anyone has stayed in office the last 12 years. If I knew how Clinton, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzalas or anyone connected to the Walstreet nonsense stayed in office, I'd be able to answer your question. But, I'm all for the law punishing anyone who breaks it.
 
Boo Radley said:
Forgive me as I never did understand how anyone has stayed in office the last 12 years. If I knew how Clinton, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzalas or anyone connected to the Walstreet nonsense stayed in office, I'd be able to answer your question. But, I'm all for the law punishing anyone who breaks it.
Click to expand...

Good. Then if it is proven that Holder broke the law, and continues to do such with misleading Congress in hearings, and ignore subpoenas then Obstruction is a violation of law and he should pay the consequences of that. I am glad we agree.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Good. Then if it is proven that Holder broke the law, and continues to do such with misleading Congress in hearings, and ignore subpoenas then Obstruction is a violation of law and he should pay the consequences of that. I am glad we agree.


j-mac
Click to expand...

On that we agree. I have never said anything other than that.
 
katsung47 said:
The origin of "Fast and Furious".

696. Two bombings to achieve the Patriot Act Bill (12/5/2011)

In 1990s twice I left US because I couldn’t endure the persecution from the Feds. At that time, the US was still a free country. I bought an air ticket. No one asked a word. There was no security search. It was like a domestic bus trip. That now becomes Alice in Wonderland. It was not the Feds wanted. They needed a power to search and detain without any reason. To achieve that goal, they activated two “terror attacks”.

The first attempt was OKC bombing. I allege so based on timing. I left US in July 1994 and returned in May 1995. The Feds must have felt the needs of a law to confine their dislikes to travel freely. To get me back to the US, they had dealt with the Chinese secret police. In April, my application to extend my stay in Shanghai was rejected. In same month, OKC bombing took place.

The evidence now proved the FBI conducted this bombing.





In early 2000s, I have learned from a news that said former FBI Chief Louis Freeh had proposed a bill similar to the Patriot Act after OKC bombing but failed to get it go through. I tried to have a google search for that article but failed. The Feds must have sheltered most information that related to their crime. They control information with their cyber team and NSA. Anyhow, I found another information little noticed by the public.



Although the Feds failed to get The Patriot Act in 1996, that AEDPA revealed their intention. Be noticed that the title shows they used terrorism to expand their power five years earlier of 911.

Next time I left US in March 1999 and returned to the States in July 2000. One year later they bombed WTC. This time they got what they wanted – the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act gives the Feds expanded (unreasonable) power of search and arrest. It seems they do not satisfy with this. Now they want to have the power to detain the citizens without trial for life.



With this Act, what’s the good for the Constitution?

697. TSA search, Canada and Mexico (12/11/2011)

In September 2009, I renewed my passport. In later September I ordered an air ticket to Hong Kong. That night, as usual, I watched the news of the Chinese tv channel KTSF26. I was astonished by a report – it showed how the Feds planting fake notes into innocent passenger’s pocket in airport security check. To propaganda an illegal action of the Feds in positive way was unusual. Obviously it was an intimidation on me – “we wouldn’t let you leave US”. After two bombings(OKC and 911), the Feds got that search power. I canceled the air ticket right away.

Several days later, on 10/4, my father passed away. I thought it was another intimidation - done by the Feds. However, my father’s death only prompted my decision of leaving. I took a Grey Hound bus to Vancouver on 10/7. I was denied to enter the Canada. No reason was given. I complained to law makers and A.G.. Most had no reply, one suggested to ask help from D.O.J. . Here is the article I wrote about this event two years ago.

Re: “611. Restricted in US (10/17/09)

Ten days ago, I was denied to enter the Canada in board check point. Since I have all the document and sufficient fund a tourist should have. I think the board officer was instructed by the misleading information from the US Federal agent. Here is my complain to Attorney General……”

It was sarcasm for a victim who suffered in a theft case to ask for help from the thief.

There are three ways for me to leave USA: 1. by air flights. It is now blocked with TSA searches and arrest. (which means a framed case by planting is possible.) 2. through Canada. It was proved being blocked by the collaboration of the Canada government. 3. Through Mexico. The tactic the Feds used is to make it a killing field so when a particularly planned murder happened, it would have been buried in mass slaughtering cases. Those drug killings, was actually a distract tactic.

After I return home from the Canada board, I started to understand the purpose of OKC bombing and 911 attack. It was for the “search and arrest” power. (for the Feds)

Then more and more killing cases in Mexico caught my eye. I thought the Feds were behind those killings. They were afraid I would leave US via Mexico. My thought was proved one year later when “Operation Fast and Furious” was revealed. It is conducted by the Feds. The purpose was not to track illegal drug trading but to cover up a possible murder by mass killings. The “Operation Fast and Furious” was created when the Feds found I intended to leave USA. Check the timing.



Since the “fall of 2009”, the media and discussion boards in Internet were full with topics of “TSA”, “pat down”, “see through screen” and bloody killings in Mexico. They had a purpose. If a passenger was arrested for carrying “fake money” or “drugs” or other illegal things, the public would believe “the TSA’s strict searches” and not doubt it’s a planting case. Or no one would have noticed a single murder in Mexico when there are so many beheading, mass slaughtering cases there.
Click to expand...

698. FBI and DEA are behind the “Fast and Furious” (12/19/2011)

1. FBI and DEA control the leaders of Mexican drug gang. Thus they actually control the drug activities of Mexico drug trading.

“Mexican Narco-Trafficker’s Revelation Exposes Drug War’s Duplicity
Posted by Bill Conroy - April 25, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Trail of Government Intrigue Leads Back to Cocaine Jet That Crashed in Mexico’s Yucatan
A high-level player with one of the most notorious narco-trafficking organizations in Mexico, the Sinaloa “cartel,” claims that he has been working with the U.S. government for years, according to pleadings filed recently in federal court in Chicago.
Mexican Narco-Trafficker “

“Gun-smuggling cartel figures possibly were paid FBI informants
Probe reveals that the U.S. agency running the 'Fast and Furious' anti-gun-trafficking operation didn't know about the alleged FBI informants. Congressional investigators are looking into the matter.

Suspected members of the Zeta drug cartel are… (STRINGER/MEXICO, REUTERS)
July 17, 2011|By Richard A. Serrano, Washington Bureau
Congressional investigators probing the controversial "Fast and Furious" anti-gun-trafficking operation on the border with Mexico believe at least six Mexican drug cartel figures involved in gun smuggling also were paid FBI informants, officials said Saturday.
The investigators have asked the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration for details about the alleged informants, as well as why agents at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which ran the Fast and Furious operation, were not told about them

Gun trafficking: Mexican gun-smuggling cartel figures possibly were paid FBI informants - Los Angeles Times “


“ Drug cartel leaders are FBI informants, official says
7 Jul 2011 San Jose Mercury News By Richard A. Serrano
Ill- fated ATF deal could have been avoided, panel hears
WASHINGTON — The embattled head of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has told congressional investigators that some Mexican drug cartel figures targeted by his agency in a gun-trafficking investigation were paid informants for the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration. “
Click to expand...

2. BATF only carries out the order from Washington.

How the "Fast and Furious" program put thousands of weapons directly into the hands of Mexican drug gangs
Here's how "Fast and Furious" worked: Under orders from Washington, ATF agents were specifically told to acquire these weapons using "straw" buyers in the USA, find new buyers in Mexican drug gangs, then sell the weapons and "lose track" of them. Although some agents raised concerns about the insanity, they were overruled by the higher-ups in Washington who wanted to pursue this policy for their own reasons. "It made no sense to us either, it was just what we were ordered to do, and every time we questioned that order there was punitive action," said Phoenix Special Agent John Dodson.

But what could be the reasons for Washington initiating such a program in the first place? Why would the Obama administration actively send 30,000 sniper rifles, assault weapons and firearms into Mexico even while claiming to follow an anti-gun stance back in the USA?

To answer that question, you need to understand P.R.S -- Problem, Reaction, Solution. It is the "playbook" that governments use to get what they want, which usually involves: 1) Disarming their populations, 2) Taking away all their rights and freedoms, and then 3) Ruling over their people as tyrants with complete power.

Precisely such an effort is now underway in the United States, led by the Obama administration which has repeatedly demonstrated itself to be an enemy of the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

US government openly admits arming Mexican drug gangs with 30,000 firearms - but why?
Click to expand...

3. Fast and Furious was not used to track the route of illegal weapons but was to cause a bloody killing field (or in National Defense Authorization Act: battle field).

To track one weapon takes a team’s work. How many people does it need to track 3,000? So the Operation from the beginning was not to track the illegal route of the gun trading but to push up a killing wave in Mexico. BATF agent also was ordered “lose track” of these weapons. The purpose is to make Mexico a killing field to stop a witness of the Feds’ crime from leaving US.
 
katsung47 said:
698. FBI and DEA are behind the “Fast and Furious” (12/19/2011)

1. FBI and DEA control the leaders of Mexican drug gang. Thus they actually control the drug activities of Mexico drug trading.



2. BATF only carries out the order from Washington.

How the "Fast and Furious" program put thousands of weapons directly into the hands of Mexican drug gangs
Here's how "Fast and Furious" worked: Under orders from Washington, ATF agents were specifically told to acquire these weapons using "straw" buyers in the USA, find new buyers in Mexican drug gangs, then sell the weapons and "lose track" of them. Although some agents raised concerns about the insanity, they were overruled by the higher-ups in Washington who wanted to pursue this policy for their own reasons. "It made no sense to us either, it was just what we were ordered to do, and every time we questioned that order there was punitive action," said Phoenix Special Agent John Dodson.

But what could be the reasons for Washington initiating such a program in the first place? Why would the Obama administration actively send 30,000 sniper rifles, assault weapons and firearms into Mexico even while claiming to follow an anti-gun stance back in the USA?

To answer that question, you need to understand P.R.S -- Problem, Reaction, Solution. It is the "playbook" that governments use to get what they want, which usually involves: 1) Disarming their populations, 2) Taking away all their rights and freedoms, and then 3) Ruling over their people as tyrants with complete power.

Precisely such an effort is now underway in the United States, led by the Obama administration which has repeatedly demonstrated itself to be an enemy of the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

US government openly admits arming Mexican drug gangs with 30,000 firearms - but why?
Click to expand...


3. Fast and Furious was not used to track the route of illegal weapons but was to cause a bloody killing field (or in National Defense Authorization Act: battle field).

To track one weapon takes a team’s work. How many people does it need to track 3,000? So the Operation from the beginning was not to track the illegal route of the gun trading but to push up a killing wave in Mexico. BATF agent also was ordered “lose track” of these weapons. The purpose is to make Mexico a killing field to stop a witness of the Feds’ crime from leaving US.
Click to expand...


An interesting perspective on hope and change.
 
Supposedly they even armed them with gernades. In my book thats militairy explosives. Cops dont use frag gernades. I remember right after reading how they let gernades go to mexico gernades were thrown into a casino. I guess the new American way is to sell guns to EVERYBODY and wait for the crazies to pop out on their own.
 
I think the real questions here are:

1. Why was the BATFE smuggling guns to Mexican drug cartels? Those guns would most likely be used to kill Mexican civilians, police, or military personnel and US Border Patrol agents.

2. How did they lose track of hundreds of weapons? They knew that they were going after the big fishes, so why not keep track of the weapons.

3. Why did Holder define Operation Fast and Furious as "deeply flawed?" It should be defined as idiotic and not well-though out.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
I think the real questions here are:

1. Why was the BATFE smuggling guns to Mexican drug cartels? Those guns would most likely be used to kill Mexican civilians, police, or military personnel and US Border Patrol agents.
Click to expand...

To make the case that the 2nd Amendment must be curtailed here.

2. How did they lose track of hundreds of weapons? They knew that they were going after the big fishes, so why not keep track of the weapons.
Click to expand...

They never planned on tracking them to begin with....Loss of life is a small consequence to Marxists propagandists.

3. Why did Holder define Operation Fast and Furious as "deeply flawed?" It should be defined as idiotic and not well-though out.
Click to expand...

Because he got caught.


j-mac
 
Mr. Invisible said:
I think the real questions here are:

1. Why was the BATFE smuggling guns to Mexican drug cartels? Those guns would most likely be used to kill Mexican civilians, police, or military personnel and US Border Patrol agents.

2. How did they lose track of hundreds of weapons? They knew that they were going after the big fishes, so why not keep track of the weapons.

3. Why did Holder define Operation Fast and Furious as "deeply flawed?" It should be defined as idiotic and not well-though out.
Click to expand...

First of all, people seem to have this notion that the operation provided the cartels something that they couldn't have obtained otherwise, which seems to be completely unsupported. In fact the operation was undertaken because they wanted to stop what appeared to be the unimpeded flow of arms from the US to Mexico. Now, I haven't followed this all that closely, but I'm guessing that there was no way to actually track each and every gun. Could they have hidden GPS trackers in the weapons? Don't know. But I think the idea was that, if the guns turned up in a bust or crime, THEN they would be able to track them back to their source and that would give them the evidence they needed to shut down that particular source. Not a bad plan from a crime prevention standpoint, but obviously a terrible plan from a public relations standpoint.
 
j-mac said:
I understand you may have forgotten about all of this...it was sooooooo long ago, an entire 3 + weeks ago....Documents: ATF used "Fast and Furious" to make the case for gun regulations - CBS News Investigates - CBS News


Good God Joe.


j-mac
Click to expand...

By some individuals in ATF? I was hoping for more. While I am sure such letters will feed the gun paranoia, the fact is not only do I doubt there was any such effort as you describe, but such would be doomed for failure. it would be a silly effort that could do nothing but fail. And it would fail even if had total admiinstration effort behind it, and not just a few individuals at ATF.

I still say you're making a huge leap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom